The largest job killer in the nation.

[marshmellow]

If there was one Dem candidate that would tell America that there is no intention by the current admin to create jobs. That there are huge benefits created by a soft labor market for the largest contributors to the republican party, They might connect with joe sixpack.

Bankers love soft labor markets, that's why they invest in overseas markets with companies that exploit them.

Soft labor markets also benefit the attack on natural resources. Soft labor markets allow the bullying of unions.

Until a candidate for president steps forward and explains to America why the corporate puppets will not bring about job growth, voters will fall for the avalanche of ads that will make them think jobs are a coming from tax breaks.

[HereSince1628]

1. The problem is global trade with no protections

Selling products everywhere sounded great, but the problem is that the products are more cheaply produced outside the US, because labor is cheap, and environmental laws are mostly unenforced if they exist.

Americans will by cheap things made overseas while the profits are bigger for multinational corporations if they can push down their production costs (labor, environmental protections, etc). Consequently, tax-cuts that once upon a dream would have freed money for investment (job creation) in the US now flow outside the country and into the global market (job creation in China etc.).

American labor is screwed when trying to compete. We may be inventive, productive, etc., but when somebody can make shoes for less then $1 an hour vs $15 and those shoes can be sold for $100 the pressure is on to produce them elsewhere.

Globalization and free-trade zones are a failure for American workers.
Ten years are long enough to feel the damage.

[marshmellow]

2. Ok, that i agree with.

In 1999, the US was on the verge of transforming itself into an information based economy, creating millions of jobs in new technical areas that had the potential to be exported everywhere.

The oil companies were not too keen on the tranformation of an industrial based economy to information based. That would render the need for oil based products in the US less and less.

100 years ago, the US transformed itself from an agriculture based economy to industrial based, we were at the front door of transforming ourselves again but big oil pulled us back by installing a regime that rewards consumption.

[AndyTiedye]

3. Nobody talks about the New Economy Anymore

It didn't go away, though Bush* has been trying to replace it with the perpetual war economy.

[dfong63]

4. nobody? except Clark the "visionary"

``Today we are in a new era. It's probably not going to be an era of machine tools, railroads and freight handling, and husky broad shoulders. It's going to be an era based on knowledge, with a knowledge-based economy--chips and data bits, clicks as well as bricks. It'll take nimble minds as well as strong shoulders. But we've got all of that. We've got it more than anybody else in the whole world.''

--- Wesley Clark, may 11, 2001. link

and more from the same speech:
``But it's going to take American leadership. And I'm delighted to see Gen. Colin Powell is working that problem actively. We've had the Colombian president up here, and I was so pleased that President Bush called for a North American Free Trade Agreement, because I think the ultimate answer in South America is to bring prosperity, bring American know-how down there, and let's build one great team in the Americas.''

[ramapo]

5. hmmm

Just where is this GI coming from?